Mathews the new ILB?

[GreenBaySlacker]

I never really thought of it. But moving Mathews to the middle would fix a few problems we have.

1. We dont have great ILBs
2 We seem to have too many tallented OLBs

In the Middle Hawk and Jones didnt get it done last year. and Lattimore doesnt give me supreme confidence entering the season. No real WOW factor. We have consistant. and we have above average play maker for half the season.

At OLB we have Peppers. Neal, and Perry could be a dominant rotation. And Mulumba is a 260 pound beast thats an above average rotation guy... This gives Perry a position, which seemed to be a question mark for some.

Its all about getting the most tallent on the field. Mathews coverage skills, and speed could be a huge upgrade inside. With a first and second rounder to fill in behind mathews...

 

[thisisnate]

Really not that eager to put our best defensive player out of position.

 

[Vrill]

Matthews is our best pass rusher.

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

Respectfully disagree. I think Clay needs to do what Clay does best.....rush the QB. I don't like the idea of putting our best defensive player in an uncomfortable position. Let Clay be Clay.

 

[TJV]

Matthews isn't moving to ILB on anything like a permanent basis. IMO what they've been doing is making the defense less predictable, particularly on passing downs.

“They definitely had me moving around from lining up in the middle of the field as a stack backer to the left, to the right, lining up in the slot, and just putting more of our playmakers on the field,” Matthews said. “I think the problem that it presents for the offense is so many moving pieces. ... I think I bring a multitude of weapons to the game and I think I could do that through lining up all over the field. I think it’s about mismatches and putting us in advantageous positions. “We’ll see how that does moving forward, but I felt good about it today and hopefully it will only get better.”

http://host.madison.com/sports/foot...cle_ddcf0235-a9d4-5b99-baa3-d4021fc81d2f.html

Peppers will be moving around some too - I think they practiced a stunt with him rushing inside yesterday. In Demovsky's ESPN radio report yesterday, he noted that Neal and Perry weren't practicing but he predicted we will be seeing a lot of LBs in various alignments on D this season. The idea I'm getting from all that's been said and written is we'll see a more attacking defense. Less 'read and react' on the DL and more one-gapping. More blitzes coming from different spots, less knowing where Clay’s pass rush will be coming from. The risk of a more aggressive D is it can be gashed for big plays, but it puts a burden on offenses and the Packers’ dynamic offense should be able to overcome the occasions when the D does get gashed.

 

[Carl]

Is this thread a joke?

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

Is this thread a joke?

My guess is probably not. Clay has been taking reps at ILB the last two days at training camp.

 

[HyponGrey]

My guess is probably not. Clay has been taking reps at ILB the last two days at training camp.

I'm with Jack, it's a subpackage. Remember that we also play a nickel set with 3 OLB and 1 DL, so that might be the actual story here.

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

I'm with Jack, it's a subpackage. Remember that we also play a nickel set with 3 OLB and 1 DL, so that might be the actual story here.

Completely agree.

 

[brandon2348]

"1-3-7 psycho package". Capers finally has the personnel to run it.

 

[mradtke66]

I'm with Jack, it's a subpackage. Remember that we also play a nickel set with 3 OLB and 1 DL, so that might be the actual story here.

If we only have a front 4, that'd be a Quarter package. 5 dbs = nickel, 6 = dime, 7 = quarter

 

[HyponGrey]

If we only have a front 4, that'd be a Quarter package. 5 dbs = nickel, 6 = dime, 7 = quarter

1 ILB would make that a Dime, still a typo on my part. Still not enough

You forgot: 4 DB = "Base"

 

[JBlood]

I thought the defensive calls were supposed to be simplified this year. Now you've got pro bowl players playing out of position? How does this simplify anything, other than making it simply mystifying?

 

[Poppa San]

I thought the defensive calls were supposed to be simplified this year. Now you've got pro bowl players playing out of position? How does this simplify anything, other than making it simply mystifying?

S-U-C-C-E-S-S! One arm chair QB down. Now to work on the rest of the league.

 

[profile_removed]

In coverage only I think Matthews would be a downgrade over Hawk and Jones, all other aspects he's an upgrade.

 

[JBlood]

While the coaches are at it, I think they ought to try Matthews on the offensive line. He'd make a hell of a center, or tackle, or even a tight end. We need more guys playing 60 minutes. I think Chuck Bednarik is still alive and he could be Matthews' personal coach on both sides of the ball.

 

[Carl]

Clay has already rushed from the inside once in awhile in the past. Him doing that is nothing new.

Him playing a significant number of snaps at ILB would be illogical though and in no way do I see it happening.

 

[Packerlover]

I think the Packers should move Matthews around to get the best pass rush from him as possible. left side, right side, delayed blitz up the middle. ANYTHING that gives him a shot at the quarterback

 

[wist43]

Matthews has played in the middle before - the most notable sack of Michael Vick in the 2010 playoff game came from the middle.

Capers had 2 down linemen (Raji and Jenkins), and sent Woodson, Matthews, Hawk, Walden on the blitz. The sack takes place at about 1:50 in this highlight.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

The name of the game in playing odd-man fronts is to create confusion and mismatches. On this play, Capers sent 6 rushers, Vick didn't read it presnap, and Matthews got home before Vick could react.

Our personnel are much better suited now to mix things up like this - mainly with the addition of Peppers, D. Jones another year wiser, and Daniels essentially filling Jenkins role.

This sack took place out of a 2-4 front, which I am hyper-critical of, but if it is used as a subpackage, and in this multiple way, it can work. In this case, Matthews being in the middle, and Woodson coming on the blitz - the Eagles were completely unprepared.

 

[TJV]

[sarcasm]What a surprise: The 2-4-5 worked great with Woodson, a dynamic Raji, Jenkins, Collins and a healthy Matthews. It could work very well to great again with a healthy Matthews, Peppers, Daniels, and D. Jones, etc. With three or four play makers Capers and his schemes work very well. With few to no play makers (when Matthews was out or one-handed) and the rest of the roster decimated by injuries, Capers and his schemes don't work well. Shocking![/sarcasm] So naturally a certain poster *****es to high heaven over and over and over again about the 2-4-5 scheme (he doesn't understand) and calls Capers names when he has few to no play makers and the rest of the roster decimated by injuries.

 

[JBlood]

A few alignments played with consistent excellence beats multiple alignments with inconsistency. Just a variant of K.I.S.S.